A Zaher1, T Sheridan. 1. Department of Pathology, Medical College of Ohio, Toledo 43614-2598, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the status of the most promising tumor markers of bladder cancer, including comparison with cytology, technical complexity and utility in patient management. STUDY DESIGN: An extensive literature search was performed, and multiple markers were evaluated. The markers with the greatest potential for use as an adjunct to cytology were reviewed to determine the value of clinical implementation. Markers with a paucity of clinical research and poor results in clinical trials were omitted from review, as were genetic and cytologic prognostic determinants. RESULTS: NMP22, bladder tumor antigen, fibrin/fibrinogen degradation products, telomerase and QUANTICYT image analysis cytometry produced the most favorable and reproducible results. Each test obtained favorable sensitivities in comparison with cytology, especially in the detection of low grade lesions. Many also retrospectively placed patients in high- and low-risk groups based on the test results, allowing increased follow-up time between cystoscopies. However, inability to detect some high grade lesions reduces their utility. CONCLUSION: Continued clinical trials using these and other predictors of bladder cancer will eventually find a test that is suitable, in sensitivity and specificity, for use in urology clinics. Until that time, these tests may be useful in conjunction with cytology to prolong the interval between cystoscopies.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the status of the most promising tumor markers of bladder cancer, including comparison with cytology, technical complexity and utility in patient management. STUDY DESIGN: An extensive literature search was performed, and multiple markers were evaluated. The markers with the greatest potential for use as an adjunct to cytology were reviewed to determine the value of clinical implementation. Markers with a paucity of clinical research and poor results in clinical trials were omitted from review, as were genetic and cytologic prognostic determinants. RESULTS:NMP22, bladder tumor antigen, fibrin/fibrinogen degradation products, telomerase and QUANTICYT image analysis cytometry produced the most favorable and reproducible results. Each test obtained favorable sensitivities in comparison with cytology, especially in the detection of low grade lesions. Many also retrospectively placed patients in high- and low-risk groups based on the test results, allowing increased follow-up time between cystoscopies. However, inability to detect some high grade lesions reduces their utility. CONCLUSION: Continued clinical trials using these and other predictors of bladder cancer will eventually find a test that is suitable, in sensitivity and specificity, for use in urology clinics. Until that time, these tests may be useful in conjunction with cytology to prolong the interval between cystoscopies.